This paper, on the subject of James Joyce, does an excellent job chronicling his education and European travel. It also advances the idea that Joyce was stubborn and uncompromising when it came to the publication of his works. It emphasizes his rejection of the catholic church as well as his devoted, but unorthodox, family life. All of these are very vital points in the explanation of the themes of Joyce's works, and a deeper understanding of the ideas and meanings he is trying to convey. However, there is a cohesion to all these ideas and important points that this paper ultimately lacks. An example of this point is found in the summary sentence in which the author states that the creative genius of Joyce and his uncompromising devotion to his art did not make him a traitor to his country and it's beliefs and ideals. This is a very powerful statement with a greater or lesser amount of truth to it (depending on the readers literary beliefs); the problem, however, is this: the paper never explicitly states that people thought he was a traitor. The essay mentions that Joyce was unable to completely realize his talents until he left Ireland. It also says that his rejection of the Catholic church was looked down upon by many people who knew him through University and the community. It also chronicles the trials and tribulations that Joyce faced to get his works published in the form he wanted them to be published in. Often times getting a dozen out right refusals and having his works banded in foreign countries. The essay also mentions that many people were unhappy with him for writing about the less than flattering side of Ireland. But no where in the essay, prior to the final line, does the author say, "Many people thought Joyce was a traitor to his country because of the negative light he cast on Irish culture." It may seem like a simple thing and not all that important in the overall essay but it detracts a certain amount of power from the final argument.
There are some details not in this paper that might shed a different light on the subject. Possibly a more detailed account of his early life could explain his eventual rejection of the catholic faith. Another device which could possibly add to this essay would be an inclusion of portions of his work. This would help to illustrate why people might think of him as a traitor to his nation. It would be helpful to readers who had not had a great deal of previous exposure to Joyce's work. Finally, the paper seems to be slightly under - researched. The reason this is mentioned in this critique is not because of faulty details or a lack of important sections. It is because there are only two sources that are cited through the work. It seems there must be more information on James Joyce than two sources. Perhaps these were the only sources that discussed the authors thesis or the only two sources available to the author. But this is a relatively minor point because the lack of sources is only obvious through the works cited and not because of any glaring bias or deficiency in the paper.
This paper was very helpful as an opening insight into the life of James Joyce. It flows coherently and strongly supports the points that it makes. It exposes the reader to some lesser known, yet very important, information on Joyce. This view opens the writings of Joyce up to a broader and more colorful understanding.