Although this play is based on 'The Dead', in general, I felt that Exiles had far less of an emotional impact than the stories in Dubliners.

At the beginning, I only gradually formed a mental image of the setting and the characters. It was not until about halfway through the Second Act that I could finally clearly visualize them.

Despite this, I still have a strong desire to see the work performed. Maybe seeing it on stage will bring a different experience and allow me to better understand and appreciate the play.

I believe that the performance can bring the story and characters to life, making them more vivid and real. It can also enhance the emotional connection between the audience and the work, allowing us to feel the emotions and conflicts of the characters more deeply.

Overall, although my initial impression of Exiles was not as good as I expected, I still look forward to seeing it performed and hope to have a more in-depth understanding and appreciation of this work.

James Joyce's only play is, without a doubt, far from being his greatest work.

However, it does offer an interesting and rather unique insight, albeit perhaps only metaphorically, into the relationship between himself and Nora.

The main characters, Richard and Bertha, are clearly modeled after them.

One can observe the dynamics and subtleties in their interactions that might mirror the real-life relationship of Joyce and Nora.

It's as if through the medium of this play, Joyce is able to explore and express certain aspects of their connection that might not have been as easily articulated in his other works.

Although the play may not have achieved the same level of acclaim as some of his novels, it still holds a certain charm and significance in understanding the complex and often tumultuous relationship between Joyce and the woman who was so central to his life.

It serves as a kind of literary snapshot, capturing a moment in time and providing a window into their world.

Ibsen's Love and the Naming of Richard Rowan

Ibsen's work is often filled with complex themes and characters. In this particular story, there is a love that leads him to name the main character Richard Rowan. Richard Rowan is depicted as a great author who has been away from Dublin for 9 years. Upon his return, he has a strange desire. He wants to hear intimately about his wife's infidelities. This unusual plot twist adds an element of mystery and drama to the story.

The idea of a man, a great author no less, longing to know such details about his wife's actions is quite fascinating. It makes the reader wonder about the nature of their relationship and what could have driven Richard to have such a wish. Is it out of a sense of curiosity, or perhaps a need to confront the truth and deal with the consequences?

The use of Wattpad as a platform for this story also gives it a modern touch. It allows for a wider audience to access and engage with Ibsen's unique vision. Overall, this combination of elements creates a captivating narrative that keeps the reader hooked from beginning to end.

There are certain things that writers don't need to fabricate, for they have actually experienced them.

I have no clue as to how autobiographical "Exiles" is. However, I do know that, despite being young and lacking in experience, I have lived through something that bears a resemblance to this play.

It is truly powerful, relatable, and has the potential to drive one to madness.

The emotions and situations depicted in the play seem to mirror some of the experiences I have had in my own life.

Maybe it's the sense of longing, the struggle for identity, or the confusion that comes with trying to find one's place in the world.

Whatever it is, "Exiles" has a way of tapping into those deep-seated feelings and making them come alive on the page.

It makes me realize that sometimes, the stories that touch us the most are the ones that are closest to our own hearts.

Move along... nothing to see here.... *blushes profusely*

Every writer is entitled to have a few less-than-stellar works. In this case, it just so happens to be Joyce's. It's best to save your precious time and simply keep going until you return to Ibsen. His plays are of a much higher caliber.

Joyce may be a renowned author, but even the greatest have their off moments. This particular piece fails to capture the essence and brilliance that he is known for.

On the other hand, Ibsen's plays are a true masterpiece. They are filled with deep emotions, complex characters, and thought-provoking themes. So, don't waste your time on this dud of Joyce's and head straight back to the brilliance of Ibsen.

This was Joyce's only completed and produced play, and in my view, it doesn't rank among his better creations.

It revolves around a love triangle involving a writer, his wife, and an old friend. The play is rather bombastic, with little action but numerous forceful proclamations of complex emotions. It lacks many of the traits that make Joyce's fiction so vivid and engaging: the historical allusions, the verbal playfulness, the wit, and the stream of consciousness segments. Clearly, Joyce's talents are more suited to the less restrictive boundaries of prose, although he did demonstrate an ability to pen good, believable dialogue.

The story centers on Richard Rowan, a writer, who, like an older Stephen Dedalus, is an idealized version of Joyce himself. We are informed that Rowan is brilliant, "different," a man of genius and clear vision. His doting wife adores him, and she is loved by Richard's overly affectionate friend Robert. Richard, being the extremely open-minded man that he is (and most likely an adulterer himself), declines to attempt to prevent this relationship from developing. However, the other two are deterred (by what? Pure devotion to Richard?) from proceeding with the affair, and that is essentially the story.

Some of the dialogue seems very un-Joycean. For instance:

ROBERT: May it not be that we are here and now in the presence of a moment which will free us, both me as well as you, from the last bonds of what is called morality? My friendship for you has laid bonds on me.

RICHARD: Light bonds, apparently.

ROBERT: I acted in the dark, secretly. I will do so no longer. Have you the courage to allow me to act freely?

RICHARD: A duel between us?

ROBERT, with growing excitement: A battle of both our souls, different as they are, against all that is false in them and the world. A battle of your soul against the spectre of fidelity, of mine against the spectre of friendship. All life is a conquest, the victory of human passion over the commandments of cowardice....

That is just one example, and unfortunately, there are many such in this play. I suspect that Joyce might have been attempting to write a hit, although I have no evidence to support that. I do know that he loved Ibsen, especially when he was younger, and he may have been trying to imitate him. So this was a bit disappointing, but in a way, I'm glad for it. A look at an artist's weaker works often offers valuable insights and enables one to see and understand his shortcomings, thus providing a more complete and empathetic overall picture.

Supposed to be feminist and kinda liberal,

but this play just oozes homoerotic tension and poor writing.

I'm not overly passionate about reading plays,

yet I can clearly distinguish the good from the bad.

Especially when I'm aware of how masterful Joyce is with his prose.

This play was inspired by Ibsen's work,

and yet it remains just as subtly sexist as Joyce's Portrait and Ulysses.

At some point in his notes, he mentions that Richard is modeled on Schopenhauer's view on women's rights,

and that's about the extent of Joyce's progressivism.

It's quite disappointing to see that a play that claims to have feminist and liberal leanings

actually falls short in so many aspects.

The homoerotic tension seems out of place and doesn't add much to the overall narrative.

The writing itself lacks the finesse and depth that one would expect from a work inspired by greats like Ibsen.

Perhaps Joyce was trying to make a statement,

but it just doesn't come across clearly.

Overall, this play is a bit of a letdown.

Joyce has once again created wonders.

It was as if every second was being lived vividly right before my eyes.

She has also dealt with the complex emotions of the characters in the best possible way.

The distorted relationships and the emotional dilemmas of the characters are melted in a single pot within a continuous solution network throughout the entire book and presented to us, but it never feels artificial.

The story unfolds in a seamless manner, drawing the reader in and making them feel a part of the lives of the characters.

Joyce's writing is so engaging that it is impossible to put the book down.

Each page is filled with anticipation and excitement, as we wait to see what will happen next.

The characters come alive on the page, with their flaws and virtues, making them relatable and endearing.

Overall, this is a masterful work of literature that will leave a lasting impression on the reader.

It was really good.

I thoroughly enjoyed every moment of it.

The experience was truly remarkable and left a lasting impression on me.

From the very beginning, I was captivated by the charm and allure of the situation.

It had a certain magic that drew me in and made me reluctant to let go.

The details were exquisite, and I found myself paying close attention to every little thing.

Whether it was the beautiful scenery, the engaging conversations, or the exciting activities, everything contributed to making it an unforgettable event.

I will always cherish the memories of this wonderful time and look forward to having more experiences like it in the future.

Unsurprisingly, the general consensus is wrong on this.

It is truly great, although at times it may seem a bit clumsy, especially often in the dialogue. Strangely so, considering that Joyce is a master of both natural and heightened speech in his other works.

This piece is an emotionally complex study of gender, sexual, marital, and homosocial politics. It features vivid characters, a clockwork structure of rotating conversational duets, cat-and-mouse suspense, and a few lyrical 'epiphanies'.

In art, there are far too few romantic relationships as honest, confusing, fucked up, and sweet as the one between Bertha and Richard here.

It offers a unique and profound exploration of the various aspects of human relationships and the complex dynamics that exist within them.

The work challenges our preconceived notions and forces us to look at these relationships in a new and different light.

Despite its flaws, it remains a remarkable and engaging piece of art that is well worth exploring and experiencing.

It's no secret that James Joyce was an admirer of the work of Henrik Ibsen.

This guy, James Joyce, was a remarkable figure in the literary world.

Not to be confused with someone else, as shown in the different images.

When asked once "And what did you do in the Great War?" James Joyce purportedly replied, "I wrote Ulysses. What did you do?"

And when asked "What did you do between Portrait of the Artist and Ulysses?," he said, "I did Ibsen."

The influence of Ibsen in Joyce's only play is undeniable. The themes, such as exile and forging one's own path in the world, are constant preoccupations of Joyce and figure in nearly all of his major works, from Portrait to the Wake.

The notes at the end of this volume are perhaps as important as the work itself, giving us a brief glimpse at what Joyce was attempting to convey in Exiles. Whether or not he did so successfully can be debated. As a stand-alone work, Exiles may not offer much of interest. However, for those interested in delving deeper, in understanding more of Joyce who is often intentionally obscure, this work should be consulted. It may not be a Joycean gem, but it does shed some light on his other works and, being semi-autobiographical like all his works, it also casts a bit of light on Joyce the man.

This is the very first time that I have had the opportunity to watch this play by Joyce, which I found in the RTVE archive.

Richard Rowan, an anti-establishment (specifically anti-Catholic) writer, makes his way back to Ireland accompanied by Bertha, his wife by natural law, and their son. Additionally, he brings along his (other) lover, who happens to be his son's piano teacher.

Once in Ireland, he reunites with his best friend, Robert, who is deeply in love with Bertha and attempts to seduce her. However, Bertha informs Richard about the affair. Richard then manipulates Bertha by leaving her alone in Robert's home and telling her that this is the way to achieve freedom.

I must admit that I did not have any affection for the characters nor did I find the story particularly engaging. Moreover, the ending, where she suddenly turns her hatred for Richard back into love, struck me as being far too abrupt and lacking in any real justification.

It left me with a sense of dissatisfaction and a feeling that the conclusion was not properly developed or earned.

Overall, my experience of watching this play was rather disappointing.