Deconstruction Happens

http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/174659

I'm rereading Victorian stuff for our test in Brit lit next Friday and this poem reminded me of Paul de Man's essay where he analyses Yeats' "Among School Children" and "how can you tell the dancer from the dance?" and all that good stuff. In class this poem seemed to generate some different interpretations in it's treatment of Ulysses. Or at least I've heard Laura and Vic argue back and forth about it since I was a freshman.

It's hard for me though to find an argument in favor of Ulysses, just because he's not a very likable figure in this poem. He doesn't seem to have much respect for is wife, son, or the people he rules, though this is probably fairly characteristic of most dictator-kings. He even projects his own desires onto his former crew, just assuming they too yearn for the same adventurous days of their youths. Maybe they just want to settle down after, you know, fighting a war for the last thirty or whatever years of their lives. Ulysses wouldn't know and doesn't seem to care.

On the other hand he gives a pretty rousing speech at the end. I guess if you're into rousing speeches and sailing "beyond the sunset and the baths of all the western stars" until you die, Ulysses might be the one for you.

But anyway, just like in "Among School Children" the poem seems to yield two completely contradictory readings that can both be supported by the poem. Does it condemn or denounce Ulysses? I don't know. Deconstruction happens, I guess. Even for the silly Victorians. What do you think about Ulysses? Would you invite him over for afternoon tea?