Yes, it puzzles me too; especially as the first recorded instances of “dogsbody” with the meaning “drudge” date from the 1920s, according to the OED (though no doubt it was in use before that).
Originally, it was naval slang for a kind of pudding. (Pease pudding; which seems very Joycean.)
“Dogsbody” turns up in a couple of later passages; it’s almost as if the word only makes sense retrospectively, in the context of those passages.
Your “backspelling” idea is interesting. I wouldn’t rule out any explanation!
That was a good choice! It is a fine tissue of allusions. First, there is the poem by Yeats, a few lines of which precede the passage:
(Hence the “woodshadows”, “white breast”, “dim sea”.)
Also there are references to:
a) Telemachus’ sea-journey to the court of Menelaus, in the Odyssey;
b) the Nereids (sea nymphs who attend upon Poseidon); their footsteps (lightshod hurrying feet) are the foam of the sea; combined with:
c) Anglo-Saxon seafarers (the “feet” of their ships that “spurn” the waves are their oars; Anglo-Saxon poetry is full of metaphors of that kind);
d) Anglo-Saxon alliterative verse, which consists of lines with two metrical units, each of two beats and linked by alliteration (twining stresses, two by two);
e) the singer (harpist) who would keep time for the rowers in an Anglo-Saxon warship.
So in answer to your questions:
Does ‘Woodshadows floated … seaward…’ suggest sunshine’s movement?
— Implicitly, I think so. I would also envisage them as the faint ghost of the poem in S’s mind, overlaying the scene in front of him.
If 1 is true, could ‘lightshod’ be also interpreted as ‘sunlightshod’ other than ‘not heavily shod’? Sunlight is somehow involved here to me.
— I think so too; “lightshod” meaning “shod with light” and “lightly shod”; and the foam too is white with light.
Do ‘two by two’ and ‘wedded’ echo each other?
— I would say so, yes: the words in each half of the Anglo-Saxon line are “in twos”, and are “wedded” by alliteration.
Could I think the whole para is beautifully rhymed?
— I would agree with you; I don’t think many writers could manage the patterning of Ws, the assonances, the play of vowels, the rhythms, etc. quite so well.
That puzzles me too. I have a note in my margin: “?simpleton”; but no source. So I think it was a guess.
I would say so, yes. The “gowned form” suggests a priest; the “shafts of soft daylight”, light through church windows; and the “coalsmoke and fumes of fried grease” are Mulligan’s incense.
Thank you so very much indeed again for your time, goodness and everything. The poem by Yeats and other references are really very helpful and known by me for the first time.
That looks like a more general allusion: in northern folklore, witches (and fairies, etc.) have a reputation for stealing milk from cows by night; while toadstools (and toads) are traditionally associated with witches and other malevolent entities.
(I’ll check though whether there is a more particular reference.)
This continues the religious theme: I think it picks up on the “Glory be to God!” of the old woman’s entrance, and Buck’s subsequent reference to “the collector of prepuces” (i.e. Jehovah, the god of the Old Testament, who requires the foreskins of his devotees, and also those of his enemies; cf. the Book of Samuel, where Saul asks David to collect 100 Philistine foreskins as a dowry; the success of the expedition is a sign of the favour of Jehovah).
More specifically, it may refer to the miraculous coin in the Book of Matthew 17:24:
It’s also a “miracle” in the prosaic sense of “something unexpected”. Buck is very short of money; earlier, he asks Stephen for a loan; once he has given the old woman the florin, he describes himself as “stony (broke)”.
His flattery of the old woman (“If we could only live on good food like that…”; and offering her a cup of tea) suggests that he is preparing not to pay her, or at least to make it very awkward for her to ask for money; but Haines’s intervention makes it impossible for him to avoid paying.
Thus Buck brings out the coin with a little joke, as if he hadn’t expected to find it in his pocket; and his bonhomie obscures the fact that he is twopence short.
Thanks again. That’s very informative and cleared up everything here completely!
Sorry to jump over to ‘Oxen of the Sun’ but I have been a little concerned about the following for a long time:
From an early explanation of yours on rhyme I can see this one now as another resembling alliterative Anglo-Saxon poetry. But I suppose “swire ywimpled” = “wire wimpled” then what’s the function of the additional “s” and “y”?
Also, is ‘wot’ an ME meaning ‘know’? If so, could it be used without ‘of’?
That section contains some very strange words. “Swire” (throat) and “ywimpled” (“y-wimpled”, provided with a wimple) are both found in Chaucer; the y- prefix usually denotes a past participle, though it may also turn up in infinitives and adjectives. “Wot” is indeed “know”; with “of” it signifies “know about”, as in Shakespeare’s
more water glideth by the mill / Than wots the miller of
but can also take a direct object, as in (again, Shakespeare’s):
The slave, a member of the country’s peace, / Enjoys it; but in gross brain little wots / What watch the king keeps to maintain the peace
There are a few more left on my mind for the Telemachus which I feel in my bones having a certain quantity of allusions but have no idea what exactly they are.
‘otto’ is attar of roses which could imply ‘The father is oil-flowing-like rich with money’ but I have no idea about ‘rotto’.
Never mentioned before, I think, what kind of toothless condition S was in.
Does it allude to his smoking?
Does it imply BM’s trade-off feeling with S?
I guess it’s BM’s head. But what does it hint at? Or nothing at all?
“Rotto” is slang for “drunk”. It’s also Italian for “broken” or “smashed”; since Joyce knew Italian, no doubt “rotto with money” (“drunk with money”) had interesting reverberations for him, since “broke” means without money.