At An Impasse

            There’s no doubt that politics and religion are controversial and emotional subjects.  But the argument between Dante and Mr. Dedalus and Mr. Casey, devolves into angry moralizing and personal attacks, making the discussion unproductive.

            Everybody becomes too emotional in the discussion, leaving nobody happy and everybody angry.  After the first part of the argument, Mr. Dedalus comments “bitterly: Well, my Christmas dinner has been spoiled already” (28).  He is already bitter and the second half of the argument hasn’t begun.  But even further, this comment is an inciteful one, designed to bait Dante into further argument.  It seems odd that he would try to continue the argument when he says it ruined his night.  Could there be some secret enjoyment that the people at the table get out of the impassioned argument?  Later in the argument, Dante calls (or at least implies) Mr. Dedalus and Mr. Casey “renegade Catholics” (29).  Dante is making an ad hominem attack, trying to discredit the men’s character instead of respond to their arguments.  This does nothing to improve the quality of discussion.  On the contrary it leads to even angrier responses like Mr. Dedalus giving, “a snort of contempt” (32).

            Furthermore, this isn’t the first time this discussion has happened.  Mrs. Dedalus, exasperated, complains that “it is dreadful to say that not even for one day of the year…can we be free from these dreadful disputes” (29).  This sort of discussion is a regular occurrence, which shows that no progress is being made.  The two sides are making personal attacks, but nobody is swaying opinions.  Furthermore, Mrs. Dedalus using “dreadful” twice in the same sentence might indicate a lack of intelligence.  She also doesn’t participate in the conversation, so it might be less that she dislikes the political conversations, but that she doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to engage in such discourse.