Obra de teatro escrita en tres actos, publicada y estrenada en 1918, recibió muchas críticas desfavorables y resultó en un gran fracaso público. "Exiliados" cuestionaba las convenciones sociales y morales relativas a las relaciones de pareja y contenía una crítica velada al atraso cultural de Irlanda a principios del siglo XX. Fue la única incursión de Joyce en el mundo del teatro. Influenciado por su admirado Henrik Ibsen, intentaba abordar los viejos temas adoptando nuevas formas dramáticas, pero sin demasiado éxito, al parecer. El autor irlandés escribió "Exiliados" mientras comenzaba a dar forma a su obra más vanguardista, "Ulises", una de las pocas novelas que no he podido terminar por el momento. Por eso, me he propuesto leer algo más del mismo autor, algo más sencillo. Esta obra de teatro se dice que tiene un fuerte componente autobiográfico, basada en un triángulo amoroso entre Richard Rowan, un escritor exiliado (alter ego de James Joyce), Bertha (alter ego de Nora Barnacle), la compañera con la que vive sin estar casados y gracias a la cual Richard ha podido componer su gran obra, y Robert Hand, periodista, amigo de Richard y enamorado de Bertha.

De hecho, algunos críticos de Joyce comentan que "Exiliados" es su peor obra y no por ello la más sencilla. Yo la catalogo como sumamente interesante. Explora las relaciones de sinceridad y autenticidad entre parejas, exponiendo que tal vez no sea la confianza y la fidelidad la base sobre la que debe sostenerse una relación emocional, sino la continua comunicación, especialmente la comunicación de la duda y la incertidumbre, pues nada es eterno. El exilio es la incomunicación entre las almas. Solo la incertidumbre tiene el poder de estimular una posible continuidad en el vínculo, una posible comunicación sincera, auténtica y continuada entre las almas. Solo la incertidumbre es capaz de aportar la libertad de elegir a cada momento. Y pienso que Joyce no iba nada desencaminado. Tengo que acabar de leer de una vez "Ulises".

Tragic theater wrapped in a cellophane square of love, with engaging and interesting dialogues but without satisfying explanations and resolutions. At first glance, quite artificial characters, only at the end do they show some kind of humanity and emotion. An anticlimactic ending for sure.

This tragic theater piece seems to have both its strengths and weaknesses. The engaging dialogues manage to draw the audience in and keep them interested throughout. However, the lack of proper explanations and resolutions leaves the viewers feeling a bit dissatisfied. The artificiality of the characters at the beginning is also a drawback, but it is somewhat redeemed by the emergence of their humanity and emotion towards the end. Overall, while the play has its moments, the anticlimactic ending somewhat dampens the overall experience. It makes one wonder if more could have been done to bring a more fulfilling conclusion to the story.

Dedicate a otra cosa, Jaime. This simple phrase holds a world of meaning. It could mean to focus on something else, to turn your attention away from the current task or situation and direct it towards another goal or activity. Maybe Jaime has been too consumed with one thing and needs to take a step back and consider other possibilities. It could also imply a sense of redirection or a change in priorities. By dedicating himself to otra cosa, Jaime might be opening himself up to new experiences, new learning opportunities, and a chance to grow and evolve in different ways. It's a reminder that life is full of choices and that we have the power to decide where we want to focus our energy and efforts. So, Jaime, take a deep breath and embrace the idea of dedicating yourself to otra cosa. Who knows what wonderful things might come your way?

After reading several of the world's best short stories, the greatest modern literary work and the hardest novel in history from Joyce, I became a fan of this writer. Reading his play, which has received relatively little attention compared to his other works, might not have been the most appropriate thing to do. But I was very satisfied myself.

I think this neglect of "Exiles" is because people imagine another crazy work from the author of "Ulysses" and "Finnegans Wake". But this play is not such a work.

Its simple form and linear narrative might seem a bit ordinary to Joyce, but the content of "Exiles" was extremely special and detailed for me. The story of love and marital relationships, which is frequently seen in the works of the 18th and 19th centuries, is depicted in a new way by Joyce.

Many of us may not be able to accept such relationships, and perhaps the decisions of the characters may seem strange or even wrong to us. But Joyce was able to look at this issue from several perspectives and invite us to witness such human relationships.

And more importantly, the doubt and hesitation that the second half of the play involves... such a sense of suspension for such a simple and ordinary story was really unexpected. Joyce did not impose a task on me. He simply presented an experience and left me, the reader, in this hesitation... and for this reason, I really enjoyed reading the work.

It's true. This play is not a masterpiece like "Ulysses" (in fact, no book is a masterpiece like that). But it is still a very valuable work from this great Irish writer.

I'm not a fan of Joyce, and perhaps that's precisely why I truly liked this play.

Exiles is significantly more straightforward than any of his novels. It is also far more dramatic and interesting than any of the short stories in The Dubliners.

I decided to give it a try after hearing that it was by far his most "conventional" work. This term appeals to me when it comes to authors like James Joyce and William Faulkner.

If you enjoy stories where you have to grapple with every sentence to appreciate their subtext and hidden meaning, then you might find this work a bit shallow compared to Ulysses or Finnegan's Wake.

However, I found it to be one of the most original takes on romantic drama I have ever encountered. The ending is far more satisfying and hopeful than I would have ever anticipated from Joyce.

The story focuses on the folly of attempting to approach romantic relationships in an enlightened and sophisticated manner. Joyce shows how trying to purify one's romantic love for someone by eliminating all jealousy and selfishness from the relationship only serves to kill the passion that makes romance so appealing in the first place.

Also, is doing the "noble thing" (such as giving your partner complete freedom to make all their own decisions) actually a form of mental torture?

The writing style of Exiles may be straightforward, but the ideas that Joyce presents offer just as much food for thought - at least for me - as his more renowned works.

Exiles is truly a remarkable play. The influence of Ibsen is palpable and, for the most part, a welcome addition. It is refreshingly liberal and open in its ideas, making it a play that is well worth the investment of time in reading. With a few tweaks, it could have ascended to the status of a masterpiece, but as it stands, it is still quite impressive.

One might wonder what changes could have been made. It's difficult to put a finger on it precisely, but the play does have a sense of being slightly unfinished. Perhaps it simply required more work and thought. There is no doubt that Exiles has the potential to be something truly special. It contains some wonderful dialogues, yet there is a sense that something is lacking. It could be that Joyce's true talent lay in the realm of the novel. Drama demands tragedy, confrontation, and that essential element of 'drama'. Even in its more modern manifestations, drama requires a conflict, a moment of intense feeling.

The Ibsen influence in this drama is evident, and as I mentioned earlier, it is generally handled quite well. However, it doesn't feel entirely natural in the sense that it doesn't perfectly fit the story. By this, I mean that the feminist issues are a bit underdeveloped. Ibsen did a better job with female characterization than Joyce. While I don't mind Joyce looking up to Ibsen, he should have honed his dramatist skills a bit more or offered a more comprehensive view of his principal female character in this play. Joyce's autobiographical approach in this work, while interesting, cannot be completely merged with the Ibsen influence, given that they were not the same individual.

Moreover, Exiles is a play that delves into a great many things. There are numerous themes at play here, perhaps too many: liberation, feminism, Ireland, religion, autobiographical elements, morality, and the list goes on. In my opinion, Joyce is perhaps too analytic to be a truly great dramatist. He is an outstanding writer, but he didn't fully realize his potential in this play. Maybe he just needed more writing practice, because despite its flaws, this play is still quite strong. Joyce did an excellent job of infusing it with a wealth of interesting ideas and thoughts, but there is still something missing. A dramatist should show, not tell. That being said, I believe that any fan of Joyce will look beyond these minor瑕疵 and be drawn to the subtle meanings hidden within his words.

I can't envision it on stage, but that doesn't bother me. I've loved many "only to read" plays. Perhaps with some editing and rewriting, Exiles could have been truly outstanding. (Here I go again with the "what ifs": If it had been a huge success, would it have been edited and improved? Ah, the questions keep coming.) I can't help but wonder what it was that the critics of the time disliked about this play. Could it have been the liberal ideas? Although there is nothing overly shocking about Exiles by today's standards, there are lines that will surely make moralists frown, such as:

"ROBERT: I am shore that no law made by man is sacred before the impulse of passion. Who made us for one only? It is a crime against our won being if we are so. There is no law before impulses. Laws are for slaves…"

To me, Exiles was a captivating read, even if I didn't always fully understand the characters, even if I had to read it more than once to get a handle on what was happening, and even if there are some faults in it. There are lines in the play that are so good that they alone justify the reading, even if the rest were complete rubbish - which it most certainly is not. Joyce is not afraid to criticize himself through the character of Richard. The character of Richard is so clearly autobiographical (and in that sense similar to Stephen and other semi-autobiographical characters Joyce created) that I have to wonder if he reproached himself with the words he put in Bertha's mouth:

"BERTHA : “ All is to be for you. I am to appear false and cruel to everyone except to you. Because you take advantage of my simplicity as you did - the first time.”"

There are parts of the dialogue between Richard and Stephen where the influence of Ibsen is obvious, such as:

"ROBERT: There are moment of sheer madness when we feel an intense passion for women. We see nothing. We thing of nothing. Only to posses her. Call it brutal, bestial, what you will. RICHARD: I am afraid that longing to posses a women is not love."

However, there are also dialogues that are more characteristic of Joyce, dialogues that raise difficult questions, expose cruel truths, and make you think. Ah, those thoughts that make his writing so wonderful. I don't even mind the fact that I feel a bit sad when and after I read them. Exiles is not without pathos. It's not a play that should never have been a play, but rather one that could have been even better. Nevertheless, it is well worth a read. I'm sure any lover of literature would appreciate it for what it is - a fine piece of writing.

\\"It is not in the darkness of belief that I desire you. But in restless, living, wounding doubt.\\"

-Richard


Don't read this play too fast. If you take the time to parse lines such as the one above, instead of skating over their vague emotion, your brain will squirm, bend, and morph as it tries to evolve into a more skillful mechanism. \\n  This is the classic Joycean headspace\\n-- or at least the best junior version of it that can be mustered on the predominantly extroverted medium of the Stage.


It is fascinating that while the primary theme of the play is Freedom, the characters in the play are bogged down by oppressive stage directions from the playwright. Every hand movement and pause is carefully dictated by Joyce himself. This is a classic dramatic effect that Joyce stole from Ibsen- whom he was obsessed with at the time. In Ibsen’s first great feminist play A Doll’s House, the CHARACTER Nora longs to be free from the domineering hand of men & society. However, at some point during the play, a keen observer will note that Nora the ACTRESS is subservient to the will of the male playwright all along. Nora’s quest for freedom is an illusion. She is a doll within a doll house within a doll house. When the viewer becomes aware of this nested Russian doll effect, the audience’s reaction is elevated from basic emotional sympathy to pure awe. This is the “grand effect” that Joyce praised Ibsen for, and it is the type of thing that Joyce is gunning for in Exiles. And it works. Mostly. If you are willing to put in the effort.


Many readers have said that the characters in Exiles seem mechanical or unrealistic. Based on Joyce’s own notes, I would argue that this is a purposeful effect. Just as the characters have been exiled physically from their homeland, and are moral exiles from the Catholic Church due to their progressive views on marriage, \\n  Joyce exiles his characters from their own emotions.\\n Joyce was a huge fan of Schopenhauer, who, if you aren't familiar with, was a philosopher who advocated Disassociation, Serenity, and Self-Awareness as the only way to ever escape being a slave to one's immediate emotional experience. Joyce treats his characters as Schopenhauer puppets. He nearly comes out and says as much in his accompanying notes to the play. The characters are exiled from their own emotions just as much as they are exiled in more tangible ways: morally and nationally. \\n  Joyce, as always, is primarily interested in demonstrating a new way of thinking,\\n at least more than he is interested in the silly business of toying with your emotions for an hour or two.


If nothing else, Exiles definitely serves as an excellent advertisement for Ibsen to English-speaking audiences. Reading Exiles gave me new enthusiasm to dive back into Ibsen, and maybe this time wrestle through the bad translations and all the distracting sentimentality to see if there are underlying philosophical bombshells and “grand effects.”

What is the most attractive thing about the most beautiful women? It's not those qualities that she has and other women don't, but the qualities that she shares with other women. I mean the most ordinary qualities... something that should be unnamed.

When you have something, it may be taken away from you. But when you give it away, it's yours forever. No thief can steal it from you. When you give something, it becomes yours forever. Giving means this.

Among the not-so-unimportant problems that the host is facing is the problem of his attitude towards those children of his who left him alone in times of need and now, in the belated victory banquet, have been called into his embrace, into the embrace of the host who finally learned in solitude and exile that he should love them.

“It is only James Joyce’s towering genius as a novelist that has led to the comparative neglect of his sole surviving play.” - J. C. C. Mays

James Joyce is widely regarded as one of the most influential novelists of the 20th century. His works, such as “Ulysses” and “Finnegans Wake,” are renowned for their complex language, innovative narrative techniques, and profound exploration of human consciousness. However, it is often overlooked that Joyce also wrote a play, which is his sole surviving one.

The reason for the relative neglect of his play may be due to the overshadowing of his extraordinary achievements in the field of novels. Joyce’s novels have received extensive critical attention and have had a profound impact on the development of modern literature. In contrast, his play has not received the same level of recognition and study.

Nevertheless, Joyce’s play should not be dismissed lightly. It may offer a unique perspective on his creative vision and artistic style. By exploring his play, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of Joyce’s oeuvre and appreciate the breadth and depth of his talent.

I have inflicted a profound injury upon my soul for you. It is a deep wound of doubt that can never be mended. I shall never know, not in this world. I have no wish to know or to believe. I simply do not care. It is not within the shadowy realm of belief that I yearn for you. Instead, it is in the restless turmoil of living, accompanied by the wounding sting of doubt. I desired to hold you without any constraints, not even those of love. To be joined with you in body and soul, completely and utterly naked. This was my longing. And now, Bertha, I am fatigued for a time.

My wound has exhausted me. It weighs heavily upon my spirit, sapping my strength and leaving me drained. I find myself in a state of weariness, both physically and emotionally. The pain of this doubt lingers, refusing to fade away. But perhaps, in this tiredness, there is a glimmer of hope for a new beginning.

I love him so much.

He is a truly special person in my life. Sometimes, he may come across as a little dumb, but that's just a part of his charm. In fact, even geniuses have their moments of being less than sharp.

His unique qualities make me love him all the more. I cherish every moment spent with him, whether he is being his intelligent self or having those endearing dumb moments.

Love him. It's a feeling that runs deep within me and shows no sign of fading. I will continue to support and care for him, through thick and thin.

Because in my heart, he is the one and only, and my love for him will always prevail.

Meh, it would probably be better to see this performed.

Nonetheless, I have read it. It's an interesting piece, but there's something about seeing it brought to life on stage or screen that can really enhance the experience.

I can imagine the emotions and expressions of the actors, the set design, and the lighting all working together to create a more vivid and engaging story.

Must finish the Wake now. I'm curious to see how it all ends and what final thoughts and impressions it will leave me with.

Hopefully, it will be as captivating as the beginning and keep my attention until the very last page.

After that, who knows what I'll read next? Maybe something completely different, or perhaps another work by the same author.

Only time will tell.