Letter to Stanislaus Joyce: ‘The order of the stories is as follows. The Sisters, An Encounter and another story [“Araby”] which are stories of my childhood: The Boarding House; After the Race and Eveline, which are stories of adolescence: The Clay [sic], Counterparts and A Painful Case, which are stories of mature life: Ivy Day in the Committee Room, A Mother and the last story of the book [ Grace ] which are stories of public life in Dublin. When you remembers that Dublin has been a capital for a thousand years, that it is the “second” city of the British Empire, that it is nearly three times as big as Venice, it seems strange that no artist has given it to the world. I read that silly, wretched book of Moore’s The Untilled Field which the Americans found so remarkable for its “craftsmanship”. O, dear me! It is very dull and flat, indeed: and ill written.’ (Letter to Stanislaus [24 Sept. 1905]; quoted in Richard Ellmann, James Joyce, 1959; 1965 Edn., p.216; publ. in Ellmann, ed., Letters of James Joyce, Viking 1966, Vol. 2, p.111; also in Ellmann, ed., Selected Letters, London: Faber 1975, p.75-78, p.77-78.)

Note: the sentence ‘When you remember [...] to the world’ is quoted back to Joyce verbatim by Stanislaus in a letter of 10 Oct. 1905, with the remark, ‘I think you should urge your case a little in this way with publishers.’ ( Letters, ed. Ellmann, Viking 1966, Vol. 2, p.116.) In James Joyce (1959), Ellmann compares the foregoing with a similar passage in Joyce’s letter to Grant Richards (15 Oct. 1905): ‘I do not think any writer has yet presented Dublin to the world. It has been a capital of Europe for a thousand years, it is supposed to be the second city of the British Empire and it is nearly three times as big as Venice. Moreover, on account of many circumstances which I cannot detail here, the expression Dubliner seems to me to bear some meaning and I doubt whether the same can be said for such words as “Londoner” or “Parisian”, both of which have been used by writers as title.’ (Ellmann, James Joyce [1959], 1965 Edn., p.216, ftn. See also Ellmann, ed., Letters, Vol. 2, Viking 1966, p.122 [but omitted from Selected Letters (1975)]. The original letter continues: ‘[... as title.] From time to time I see in publishers’ lists announcements of [122] books on Irish subjects, so that I think people might be willing to pay for the special odour of corruption which, I hope, floats over my stories. Faithfully yours / Jas. A Joyce’. (Letters, 1966, Vol. 2, pp.122-23.)

Letter to Grant Richards (I): ‘My intention was to write a chapter in the moral history of my country and I chose Dublin for the scene because that city seemed to me the centre of paralysis. I have tried to present it to the indifferent public under four of its aspects: childhood, adolescence, maturity and public life. The stories are arranged in this order. I have written it for the most part in a style of scrupulous meanness and with the conviction that he is a very bold man who dares to alter in the presentment, still more to deform, whatever he has seen and heard. I cannot do any more than this. I cannot alter what I have written.’ (Letter to Grant Richards, 5 May, 1906; Richard Ellmann, ed., Letters, [1966], Vol. 2, ed. p.134; also in Selected Letters, 1975, p.83.) [On use of scrupulous, cf. letter to Stanislaus Joyce, 18 [Sept.] 1905: ‘Your remark that “Counterparts” shows a Russian ability in taking the reader for an intracranial journey set me thinking what on earth people mean when they talk of “Russian”. You probably mean a certain scrupulous brute force in writing and, from the few Russians I have read, this does not seem to be eminently “Russian”.’ (Richard Ellmann, ed., Selected Letters, 1975, p.73.)

Letter to Grant Richards (II): ‘If I eliminate them [i.e., the points to which Richards’ printer objected] what becomes of the chapter of the moral history of my country? I fight to retain them because I believe that in composing my chapter of moral history in exactly the way I have composed it I have taken the first step towards the spiritual liberation of my country. Reflect for a moment on the history of the literature of Ireland as it [88] now stands at present written in the English language before you condemn this genial illusion of mine, which, after all, has served me in the office of a candlestick during the writing of the book.’ (20 May 1906; Richard Ellmann, ed., Selected Letters, Faber 1975, pp.88-89.)

Letter to Grant Richards (III): ‘I send you a Dublin paper by this post. It is the leading satirical paper of the Celtic nationss, corresponding to Punch or Pasquino . I send it to you that you may see how witty the Irish are as all the world knows [...] you will see for yourself that the Irish are the most spiritual race on the face of the earth. Perhaps this may reconcile you to Dubliners . It is not my fault that the odour of ashpits and old weeds and offal hangs [89] about my stories. ... I seriously believe that you will retard the course of civilisation in Ireland by preventing the Irish people from having one good look at themselves in my nicely polished looking-glass.’ (23 June 1906; Stuart Gilbert, ed., Letters, Vol. 1 [1957], Viking Edn. 1966 [ed. Richard Ellmann], pp.63-64; also in Ellmann, ed., Selected Letters 1975, p.90.)